privilege, White privilege), and interest in social justice among college students. Social Justice and ... racial color-blindness (especially with a Black confederate), they were substantially less ...... ogress_report_june_2013_new.pdf. Neville ...
RACIAL COLOR-BLINDNESS AND PRIVILEGE AWARENESS IN RELATION TO INTEREST IN SOCIAL JUSTICE AMONG COLLEGE STUDENTS Ja’Nina Garrett-Walker University of San Francisco* Sonja Martin Poole* Sienna L. Williams* Caleb J. Banks Carnegie Mellon University Justine A. Stallings* Kristian R. Balgobin* Dylan P. Moore* Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity Volume 4, Issue 2 | 2018 Copyright © 2018 Board of Regents of The University of Oklahoma on behalf of the Southwest Center for Human Relations Studies. Permission of the Publisher is required for resale or distribution and for all derivative works, including compilations and translations. Quoting small sections of text is allowed as long as there is appropriate attribution.
Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity | 2018
RACIAL COLOR-BLINDNESS AND PRIVILEGE AWARENESS IN RELATION TO INTEREST IN SOCIAL JUSTICE AMONG COLLEGE STUDENTS Ja’Nina Garrett-Walker University of San Francisco* Sonja Martin Poole* Sienna L. Williams* Caleb J. Banks Carnegie Mellon University Justine A. Stallings* Kristian R. Balgobin* Dylan P. Moore* An online survey examining racial color-blindness, privilege awareness, and social justice was administered to a sample of 381 college students (Mage = 20.53, SD = 4.35). Using multiple regression, increases in heterosexual and class privilege awareness predicted increases in student interest in social justice while increased levels of racial color-blindness predicted decreases in student interest in social justice. These findings suggest that racial color-blindness may serve as a barrier to engagement in social justice while heterosexual and class privilege awareness may buffer the aforementioned barrier. Professors and university administration should consider ways in which they infuse conversations around diversity, privilege, and racial color-blindness into their curriculum. The notion that race does not matter – that the 21st century is a post-racial era – appears to be pervasive in the United States (Bonilla-Silva, 2014; Johnson, 2006). Racial color-blindness contends that the best way to end discrimination is by treating individuals as equally as possible, without regard to race, culture or ethnicity (BonillaSilva, 2014; Neville, Awad, Brooks, Flores, & Bluemel, 2013). However, research continues to illustrate the profound ways in which racial color-blindness negatively impacts race relations and an individual’s ability to recognize racialized structures and 38
Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity | 2018 practices (Apfelbaum, Sommers, & Norton, 2008; Bonilla-Silva, 2014; Holoien & Shelton, 2012; Richeson & Nussbaum, 2004; Ryan, Hunt, Weible, Peterson, & Casas, 2007). Acknowledgement of the existence of racialized, and other social privileges, appears to have the opposite effect (Case, 2007; Neville, Poteat, Lewis, & Spanierman, 2014). People in dominant groups are frequently unaware, or deny, the existence of social privileges (Johnson, 2006; McIntosh, 1988; Pratto & Stewart, 2012). Being aware of social privileges and inequity, based on racial and other group identification differences (class, gender, sexual orientation, ability, religion), is squarely situated in social justice. Achieving social justice is predicated on collective awareness, understanding, and interest in issues related to dismantling systematic, structural, and institutional discriminatory practices and behaviors (Salinas & Guerrero, 2018). Intersectionality proposes that to reach liberation for all marginalized groups, a clear and conscious awareness of individual differences must be acknowledged and understood (Carastathis, 2016; Crenshaw, 1991; Ferber, 2012). Intersectionality scholars hold at the center of their articulations the need to dismantle racial colorblindness through the acknowledgment of racism, classism, sexism, ableism, and cissexism, in an effort to stay committed to social justice (Carastathis, 2016; Crenshaw, 1991; Ferber, 2012). Although research on racial color-blindness has predominantly examined interracial interactions, using intersectionality as a framework, the theoretical implications of racial color-blindness can, and should, be expanded to other social identities such as gender, sexual orientation, ability, religion, and social class (Collins, 2013; Crenshaw, 1991; Delgado & Stefancic, 2012; Ferber, 2012; Johnson, 2006; Smith & Shin, 2014). It is plausible that individuals who perpetuate racial color-blindness may
39
Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity | 2018 also avoid conversations around other social privileges as well (Ferber, 2012). This study seeks to examine the relationship between racial color-blindness, privilege awareness (i.e., Christian privilege, class privilege, heterosexual privilege, male privilege, White privilege), and interest in social justice among college students. Social Justice and Interest in Social Issues Social justice is the equitable access to resources, the promotion of human rights, and the desire to transform a society’s social and political climate to reflect the needs of marginalized groups (National Association of Social Works, 2015). Research has recently articulated the relationship between student interest in social issues and their future participation in the dismantling of social inequalities through social justice activities (Hurtado, 2003; Lewis, Neville, & Spanierman, 2012; Todd, McConnel, & Suffrin, 2014). In order to develop an interest in social justice, and be effective in social justice activities, it is necessary to be aware of structural inequalities. Todd et al. (2014) examined the relations between Christian conservatism, White privilege awareness, and interest in social justice among college students. They found that increased privilege awareness levels predicted interest in social justice action among participants (Todd et al., 2014). In regard to racial color-blindness and social justice attitudes, Lewis et al. (2012) found that students reporting higher levels of racial color-blindness were less likely to report interest in issues of social inequality. Higher education serves as a structure to instill equity-focused rhetoric and behavior into future generations. Within classrooms and campus events, students can be, and should be, challenged to dismantle power and privilege and dismantle the fallacy of racial color-blindness. Given that students within higher education go on to impact many sectors of society, it is
40
Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity | 2018 imperative that they leave college with a lens that is focused on justice and social issues (Brennan, 2008; Brennan & Naidoo, 2008). Past research seems to suggest the importance of examining racial color-blindness, privilege awareness, and interest in social justice simultaneously, although, to the authors knowledge, there have been no publications to date that examine all three constructs simultaneously. Racial Color-blindness Racial color-blindness is an ideology which posits that the most effective means of ending discrimination is through egalitarianism, without regard to race, culture, or ethnicity. This ideology is often promoted as a solution to race-related problems and is coupled with an avoidance of conversations about, or acknowledgement of, race (Apfelbaum et al., 2008; Bonilla-Silva, 2014; Neville et al., 2014; Tarca, 2005). Scholars have detailed the cognitive processes that individuals go through when prescribing to racial color-blindness. The denial of the permanence of racism (Bell, 1993; Sue, 2015), the emotional responses related to discussing race and racism (i.e., anxiety, fear, guilt) (Johnson, 2006; Sue, 2015), and the use of rhetorical tools such as projection and minimization (Bonilla-Silva, 2014) have maintained this modern form of racism. Racial color-blindness is often utilized by individuals within dominant groups to not be perceived as racist. However, such ideologies have been associated with increased bias toward marginalized groups and have been shown to have a negative effect on the experiences of people of color (Apfelbaum et al. 2008; Holoien & Shelton, 2012; Richeson & Nussbaum, 2004). Apfelbaum et al. (2008) found that when White Americans were primed with racial color-blindness (especially with a Black confederate), they were substantially less
41
Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity | 2018 likely to discuss race than participants primed to a race-acknowledged condition. When assessing implicit bias among White college students, participants primed with a racial color-blindness prompt reported significantly more racial bias than those primed with a multicultural prompt (Richeson & Nussbaum, 2004). Holoien and Shelton (2012) found that when Asian American and Black American participants were paired with a White partner primed for a racial color-blindness, they performed poorly on a cognitive performance test when compared to their counterparts who were matched with a White partner primed for multiculturalism. Similarly, within the workforce, racial color-blindness of White employees was a significant predictor of their co-workers’ (people of color) psychological engagement on the job (Plaut, Thomas, & Goren, 2008). Individuals that adhere to racial color-blindness do not discuss or acknowledge systems that perpetuate social inequality. This line of thinking works in antithesis to the development of individuals who are dedicated to social issues and social justice (Apfelbaum et al., 2008; Ferber, 2012; Holoien & Shelton, 2012; Hurtado, 2003; Lewis et al., 2012; Plaut et al., 2008; Richeson & Nussbaum, 2004). Based on these previous findings, we hypothesize that: Hypothesis 1: Increases in racial color-blindness will predict decreases in interest in social justice. Privilege Awareness Although researchers have argued that racial color-blindness is primarily a function of White privilege (Bonilla-Silva, 2014; Tarca, 2005), privilege is also imbedded in other social classifications. Privilege has been defined as access to unearned rights and advantages that are only provided to people within dominant social groups
42
Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity | 2018 (Johnson, 2006; McIntosh, 1988; McIntosh, 1989). In the United States, being born heterosexual, able-bodied, male, cisgender, Christian, or into a financially stable family often comes with various forms of material and symbolic privilege (Alexander, 2012; Bonilla-Silva, 2014; McIntosh, 1988; National Equal Pay Task Force, 2013). These resources, that are associated with social privilege, may positively influence an individual’s health, happiness, safety, education, intelligence, and future opportunities (Crosley-Corcoran, 2014; McIntosh, 1988). While access to privilege does not guarantee individual positive outcomes, it is considered an asset that is often denied to others based solely on group membership rather than talent, ability, or aspiration (McIntosh, 1988). Research investigating privilege and oppression has indicated that acknowledgement and discussion of privilege may lead to increased awareness of inequality and improves dominant attitudes toward oppressed groups (Becker, Zawadzki, & Shields, 2014; Blumenfeld & Jaekel, 2012; Case, 2007; Stewart, Latu, Branscombe, Phillips, & Denney, 2012). Case (2007) found that students, who engaged in a course that explicitly addressed privilege and social oppression, were more aware of White privilege and racism at the end of the course. Similarly, Neville et al. (2014) found that students who took diversity related courses, and attended diversity activities on campus, reported decreases in racial color-blindness over their four-year college career. Stewart et al. (2012) found that when White participants, with high efficacy to reduce racial bias, were placed in a White privilege awareness group, they reported more positive views toward Black Americans. While most work on privilege awareness has historically focused on race, there has been some research that has explored
43
Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity | 2018 privilege across other social categories and social settings. Case et al. (2012) engaged students and faculty in a series of participatory action research around the inclusion of transgender students. Although structural barriers prevented transgender inclusion policies at the university level, participants reported increased knowledge and awareness of cisgender privilege on an individual level (Case et al., 2012). Zawadzki, Shields, Danube, and Swim (2014) developed an experiential learning experience that increased participant awareness of male privilege and gender equity, in addition to decreasing participant sexist attitudes. Combined, these studies highlight the positive impact of having conversations about social group differences. An inability, or unwillingness, to recognize differences in others makes it increasingly difficult to become aware of the ways in which privilege is ever present in society. The luxury of not acknowledging privilege is similar to the tenets of racial colorblindness where one is unwilling to see race by engaging in power and color evasion (Ferber, 2012; Neville et al, 2014; Johnson, 2006). Research has proposed that adoption of racial color-blindness may evolve from a lack of privilege awareness (Kleinman, Spanierman, & Smith, 2015; Tarca, 2005). While racial color-blindness seems to be perpetuated by an inability to acknowledge the ways in which privileges permeate society, the acknowledgement of privilege may allow individuals to increase advocacy for disenfranchised groups. Based on these findings, we also hypothesize that: Hypothesis 2: Increases in social privilege awareness will predict increases in interest in social justice.
44
Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity | 2018 Methods This research study investigated racial color-blindness and various social privileges as they relate to interest in social justice within a higher education setting utilizing online quantitative research methods. Participants and Procedures College students (296 women, 85 men, Mage = 20.53, SD = 4.35. range [17-57]) from a Jesuit University, with a focus on social justice in California, were recruited to participate in a 15-minute online survey, in fall 2014, assessing their knowledge of social inequalities and engagement in social justice activities (See Table 1 for demographics). A stratified random sample of college students was provided by the University across major and academic standing. However due to a low response rate (10%) additional participants were recruited through faculty emails to students. All faculty were provided with the same email script (that was sent to the stratified random sample) to send to their roster of students through CANVAS (a platform similar to Blackboard). The study protocol was approved by the University Institutional Review Board and participants indicated their consent through an online consent form. Measures Several measures were used to assess knowledge of various privileges (i.e., Christian privilege, class privilege, heterosexual privilege, male privilege), racial colorblindness, interest in social justice, and demographic characteristics (age, gender, ethnoracial identity, family income, year in college). Class privilege awareness scale (CPAS). The CPAS, an adaptation of the White Privilege Attitudes Scale (Pinterits, Poteat, & Spanierman, 2009) assessed
45
Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity | 2018 Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of Participants Demographic Characteristics as a Percentage of the Sample (N= 381) n (%) Ethnoracial Background African Descent 19 (5.00) Asian Descent 95 (24.93) European Descent 174 (45.93) Latin Descent 33 (8.66) Multiracial 47 (12.34) Other 12 (3.14) Family Income $81,000
29 (7.60) 59 (15.50) 85 (22.30) 72 (18.90) 136 (35.70)
Year in College Freshmen Sophomore Junior Senior
118 (31.00) 84 (22.00) 88 (23.10) 91 (23.90)
Academic Discipline* Liberal Arts Professional
199 (65.70) 104 (34.30)
Sexual Orientation Heterosexual 300 (21.30) Queer 81 (78.70) Note: Queer = any sexual orientation that is not heterosexual. * missing data due to technical problem at the beginning of the data collection period
participant’s attitudes toward class privilege. Twenty-eight questions examined awareness of class privilege through four subscales: willingness to confront class privilege, anticipated costs of addressing class privilege, awareness of class privilege, and remorse of class privilege. Each item was assessed on a 6-point Likert scale (1= strongly disagree to 6 = strongly agree) and subscales were summed for analysis. Only
46
Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity | 2018 the awareness of class privilege subscale (four items) was utilized (e.g., Our social structure system promotes class privilege) (See Appendix A). Higher scores represent more awareness of class privilege (Cronbach’s α = .70). Color-blind racial attitudes scale (CoBRAS). The CoBRAS (Neville, Lilly, Duran, Lee, & Browne, 2000) evaluated the degree to which participants reported racial color-blindness. Such ideologies were assessed through acknowledgment of racial privilege, institutional discrimination, and blatant racial issues. Twenty questions (e.g., Racism may have been a problem in the past, but it is not an important problem today) were presented on a 6-point Likert scale (1= strongly disagree to 6 = strongly agree). Mean total scores for each participant were used. Higher scores indicated greater racial color-blindness and greater unawareness of racial discrimination (Cronbach’s α= .889). Privilege and oppression inventory (POI). The POI (Hays, Chang, & Decker, 2007), a thirty-nine item questionnaire, examined participant awareness of White privilege (Cronbach’s α= .928; e.g., Whites generally have more resources and opportunities), heterosexual privilege (Cronbach’s α= .919; e.g., Gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals do not have the same advantages as heterosexuals), Christian privilege (Cronbach’s α= .922; e.g., Christian holidays are given more prominence in society than non-Christian holidays), and male privilege (Cronbach’s α= .904; e.g., Women are not recognized in their careers as often as men). Items were scaled on a 6point Likert scale (1= strongly disagree to 6 = strongly agree) and were summed, then divided by the number of items in the subscale, for scoring. Higher scores on each subscale represented more awareness of each privilege. Interest in social justice. To measure students’ interest in social justice,
47
Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity | 2018 students completed Part III of the Social Issues Questionnaire (SIQ; Miller et al., 2009). Part III assessed student interest in social justice issues/activitites (Cronbach’s α= .896; e.g., How much interest do you have in volunteering your time at a community agency; reading about social issues (e.g., racism, oppression, inequality)). Each question was measured on a 10-point Likert scale (0 = not at all likely to 9 = extremely likely). Items on each subscale were summed and then divided by the number of items in the subscale, for scoring. Data Analysis A series of Pearson correlations were run to explore the relationships between privilege awareness, racial color-blindness, and interest in social justice. T-test and oneway ANOVA with post-hoc tests were performed to determine if participants differed on the outcome variable, interest in social justice, based on demographic variables. Gender was dichotomized based on the distribution of the data. Transgender women Table 2 Correlation of key variables Measure
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1. Interest in Social Justice
--
-0.44**
0.39**
0.25**
0.39**
0.33**
0.33**
--
-0.74**
-0.49**
-0.61**
-0.54**
-0.69**
--
0.47**
0.55**
0.53**
0.59**
--
0.68**
0.66**
0.75**
--
0.78**
0.71**
--
0.71**
2. Racial color-blindness 3. Class Privilege Awareness 4. Christian Privilege Awareness 5. Heterosexual Privilege Awareness 6. Male Privilege Awareness 7. White Privilege Awareness Mean
-6.23
2.64
4.65
4.40
4.66
4.90
4.42
Standard Deviation
1.79
0.76
0.92
1.03
0.93
0.88
0.96
48
Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity | 2018 Table 3 Demographic Differences on Outcome Variable Interest in Social Justice M Gender Women Men Academic Discipline Liberal Arts Professional Sexual Orientation Queer Heterosexual Ethnoracial Background African Descent Asian Descent European Descent Latin Descent Multiracial Other Year in College Freshmen Sophomore Junior Senior Income $81,000
t-value
p-value
-3.02
p
